ViewSonic V3D231 3D Display - The Passive Approach
by Chris Heinonen on December 30, 2011 12:00 AM ESTThe V3D231 is a conventional TN display, which means the viewing angles are not fantastic. In day to day use they didn’t bother me, but as soon as you start to move off axis too much you get very large contrast and color shifts. This might be why they only provided the single set of 3D glasses, as when I was testing I found I needed to be in the exact right spot or my viewing experience would vary dramatically.
Uncalibrated, the V3D231 performs no better or worse than most displays I have seen. The best thing about its results is that it offers a much more linear grayscale than most non-professional displays, with the peak dE error being around 12 instead of the 14-16 that I commonly see. This is still very poor performance, but in comparison to many consumer displays it is slightly better. I did my testing uncalibrated in the sRGB mode, which was the most accurate but also will not let you adjust the brightness or contrast when selected. Since the sRGB standard has a target of 120 nits and not the 200 nits we usually use, this will look darker than what you might like. If you don’t have access to any calibration equipment and want the most accurate picture out of the box, it is the mode that I would choose.
Using ColorEyes Pro and an i1Display2 colorimeter, I then calibrated the ViewSonic to our target values: 200 nits of light output, a D65 white point, 2.2 gamma, and minimum black level. This resulted in an average dE less than 2 with a fairly linear grayscale. The ViewSonic did not do well with shades of blue, and the error there was some of the highest from all of the displays we have reviewed. Here again we have decent performance, but nothing outstanding.
To test how the ViewSonic would perform for print work, I once again used ColorEyes and the i1Display2, only this time I chose a target of 100 nits instead of 200 nits, which is closer to the level of light output you would get reflected off the printed page. Once again we have an average dE of under 2.0, but if you look at the chart you will see that the grayscale is far worse than any other display we have tested recently. Apparently the V3D231 has issues with calibration down to 100 nits, perhaps caused by the use of the patterned retarder on the screen for 3D. Regardless of what causes this issue, the ViewSonic is not a monitor I would consider using for print work as any other monitor we have reviewed does a much better job with grayscale quality.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
42 Comments
View All Comments
MattM_Super - Wednesday, January 4, 2012 - link
I also disagree with you about 60hz flicker not being perceptible. 60hz CRTs drove me nuts and the flicker in Nividia's 3d vision is similarly annoying. I don't seem to have any problems with theater 3d using polarized glasses.As far as 60hz vs 120hz LCDs go, 60hz monitors don't flicker noticeably since they are continuously lit. However, 120hz (with 120fps) has less tearing and ghosting in horizontally moving shapes and clearer textures when turning or strafing in 1st person games
MattM_Super - Wednesday, January 4, 2012 - link
I should add that 60hz flicker is like a very high pitched tone. Some people can hear a loud annoying eeeeee, while others just don't hear anything at all. I know people (myself included) who instantly notice when they sit down in-front of a 60hz CRT (or any CRT set to 60hz) and others who can't tell a difference in a blind test.robinthakur - Wednesday, January 4, 2012 - link
Completely agree. The first monitor I got years ago supported 60Hz, 100Hz and 120Hz. At 60, viewing was flickery and uncomfortable with ahigh pitched CRT whine, at 100 was smooth and 120 was a dream. Even if the display switched back to 100Hz without me initially realising, I soon got a feeling that it wasn't as smooth as it could be. In the same way, I find it incredibly hard to like games which play at less than 60fps. The difference is absolutely noticeable, and enhances everything about the game's animation when it is at or above 60. I probably got this from the Dreamcast with its VGA box and refused to play games that didn't support it because they were the games which didn't run at 60fps (with the exception of the Capcom fighters) lolrobinthakur - Wednesday, January 4, 2012 - link
I'm afraid, as an owner of both passive 3d and Active 3d TV's I would completely disagree with you. I owned a Panasonic VT30 50" Active 3D display and got absolutely sick of the headaches, eye-strain, dim images and flickering I got from my window behind the TV. In addition, you have to charge the glasses all the time and have a spare set available in case the charge goes flat whilst watching a movie. At £50 per set, they were too expensive to buy a large enough number for the family to watch TV at the same time, so the feature was used very sparingly.I happened to see an LG passive screen at my mate's house a couple of months ago and had my eyes opened to the potential of 3D in the home. After having slagged off his choice for the 'halved' vertical resolution, I had to admit my mistake as it was so comfortable watching the image and at the correct viewing distance, I couldn't perceive any negative effects such as obvious line structure from the FPR. The long and the short is that I have replaced my Panasonic with a shiny new LG passive Cinema 3D set (which comes with 7 pairs of glasses) and would not go back if they paid me. We now watch a great deal of 3D OTA and Blu Ray 3D programming and it has made the format people-friendly.
The choice might not be superior on paper, hence my original purchasing decision, but it is borderline scandalous that they majority face of 3D in the home at this time is a technology which is simply more trouble than it is worth for the majority of normal people without dedicated Home cinemas. Samsung/Sony/Pansonic et al risk the failure of the whole 3D industry with their current technology IMO.
This Viewsonic display is not best of breed either when it comes to passive, so don't write off the technology based on it.
Sabresiberian - Friday, December 30, 2011 - link
LG makes IPS panels with what they call film-type pattern retarder (FPR) technology. I'm not sure how that is different from what this monitor has, or if it's even different.I'm not thrilled with the idea of these monitors because they don't use or promote 120Hz screens, which is something I'd really like to see become an industry standard. I'm also rather disappointed to see interlacing make a comeback, I thought that was dead. Still it offers something for those who can't use the shutter based 3D, which is a good thing, I think.
The most important part, for me, though is that LG is using this on IPS panels. It's the first time 3D has been sold on an IPS panel, and that is, in my opinion, good progress and I congratulate LG for that.
Hopefully, LG will see fit to send Anandtech a panel for testing purposes.
;)
Conficio - Friday, December 30, 2011 - link
Which model is the LG IPS 3D Display?Death666Angel - Saturday, December 31, 2011 - link
LG 27" DM92 will be an IPS with 3D capabilities and 1440p resolution. At least that's what the news say. We'll know more when CES comes.Earballs - Sunday, January 1, 2012 - link
"I'm not thrilled with the idea of these monitors because they don't use or promote 120Hz screens, which is something I'd really like to see become an industry standard"+ all the rep in the world
robinthakur - Wednesday, January 4, 2012 - link
Why can't we have 120fps IPS passive screens? I'm holding out for that because I can't use Active 3D due to the headache inducing flicker I can perceive (the same reason I can't watch DLP projected images using a colour wheel - I see rainbows)imaheadcase - Friday, December 30, 2011 - link
I don't know anyone who even cared about 3d movies, let alone to see one specifically for that.